Krzysztof Kozmic - All Comments

re: How to force Nuget not to update log4net to 1.2.11

Krzysztof Kozmic — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:25:08 GMT

@Søren

Castle is built against log4net 1.2.10 and since 1.2.10 and 1.2.11 are not compatible yes, you would need a built of Castle log4net integration compiled against log4net 1.2.11

re: How to force Nuget not to update log4net to 1.2.11

Søren — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:14:17 GMT

What if I actually would like to use log4net 1.2.11 ?? Do I then need to recompile Castle?

re: How to force Nuget not to update log4net to 1.2.11

Leon van Bokhorst — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:51:23 GMT

Thanks a lot. This is a lifesaver for me.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Nicholas Carey — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 20:09:28 GMT

On occassion, I've used NUnit as an execution framework for batch jobs in an ETL environment, where we'd be FTP'ing a zip file with a lot of different files. The zip file would need to be unpacked and each different file or file type would need to be parsed, translated and loaded into our system. Worked great!

Test harnessess...they're not just for testing!

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Elliott Edwards — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:08:04 GMT

I certainly appreciate the concept of using unit tests as a quick write, compile, run loop and totally agree with that angle. If I can avoid launching the full app to test/verify then I will.

That said, LinqPad works very well for testing stuff you wouldn't care to check in to source control.

And on the topic of the Mono REPL stuff, check out Roslyn, Microsoft's new Compiler as a Service. It includes an interactive C# window in visual studio.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Mike Paterson — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:43:17 GMT

Big +1 for LinqPad.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

dagda1@scotalt.net — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:27:53 GMT

If C# or .NET had an interactive console then this would be unneccessary.

I'm not sure if .NET 5.0 will have one of these.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Klaus Hebsgaard — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:57:21 GMT

LinqPad is cool.

The mono framework has a csharp REPL, which is even easier.

Your capcha does by the way not work on an ipad...

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Ray — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 15:12:42 GMT

Like, Mikke, I generally use LinqPad for this sort of thing unless I'm testing a theory/assumption that requires a bunch of references and setup that my test project already has in place. Hell, I use it for that a ton more than I do for linq-querying.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

John Woodard — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:06:18 GMT

Excellent article, except for one thing: I would check them in, because later when someone questions whether an equation will always produce the correct results they can see the test showing that it does. So you're not verifying that the behavior doesn't change, since that would be the road to disaster, but you're documenting how a no-s0-clear behavior actually behaves, because if you weren't sure about it, others won't be either.

re: Testing framework is not just for writing… tests

Michal Sakowicz — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 13:52:00 GMT

You can use LinqPad for checking code snippets as well. It's faster to start it than another instance of VS.

re: Approval testing – value for the money

Rasmus Kromann-Larsen — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:07:58 GMT

Nice approach. Interestingly enough I used the exact same approach in my CS compiler class in S/ML before I knew anything about unit testing frameworks. Worked amazingly. Maybe I should give it a spin for my C# projects now.

re: Approval testing – value for the money

Krzysztof Koźmic — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:06:46 GMT

@Erik

There's nothing Windsor or IoC specific about the approach. We're using it for example to approve non-nullable foreign keys in our schema, or list of records we're dropping when pulling data from external system.

re: Approval testing – value for the money

Erik — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:29:45 GMT

I'm intrigued by this concept, and by the idea of enforcing at the design level and not just the unit level in general. Out of curiosity, is this specific to Castle Windsor, or is the process and set of tools that you're using to accomplish general enough to extend to other IoCs or even code not using an IoC?

re: Castle Windsor 3.0 is released

You thought wrong — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 23:21:59 GMT

Moq broke